I am attaching all necessary information including the last paper written and can reuse the facts and issues paragraph from assignment one and two (attached); you may reuse the content in both papers verbatium if needed. (All attached—the first/second assignment was a Memo as well as this one). The paper should be between 1,400 and 2,000 words.
This is the feedback I received from the previous paper.
Include in assignment instructions: Feedback from the previous paper (assignment 2)
Ethical Dilemma:
Great job! Ethical dilemma is identified and described correctly.
Perhaps, you would like to elaborate upon the “conflict in loyalties” here.
Utilitarianism:
Arguments towards application of theory to the case are on the right lines, but need to be more correct and complete. You need to show me how the end-effects you talk of will come about as a result.
However, some of the arguments need to be more logically developed.
Make feasible and practical assumptions while tracing the consequences of the two choices.
Luke has two choices: he either tells or does not tell. So, this is same as does not tell; do remember that.
Luke has no control over what Owen may choose to do with this information.
There is very much a possibility of Owen sharing about his choice (with possible reasons) about selling his house with the other home owners in the neighbourhood, leading to a risk of protests and potential lawsuits against ABC Co. subsequently, alongwith a possibility of Luke being identified as the source of the leak and resulting consequences, etc. Or, it may even be deciphered by association when the project information becomes public, even though Owen may try to keep this confidential.
You also need to more realistically consider the harms of the project plans of ABC coming stuck. Many people could lose their jobs, which is a REAL loss for them, as against a NOTIONAL loss in the property values, unless someone has to sell out at a loss.
Besides, Luke does not appear concerned about the surrounding community, as per case facts.
You must also consider the criticisms of the theory for a more balanced analysis, e.g., what’s greater benefit or greater harm; who decides that, etc.
Universal Ethics:
Good arguments made towards application of theory to case facts. However, the arguments could be developed a little more fully here, to bring out the key tenets of the theory. In general, considering the difficulty in applying this theory, Luke would be faced with a dilemma about what would be the right choice to follow in this case.
What should Luke do, that everyone else could also follow universally?
You must also consider the criticisms of the theory for a more balanced analysis, i.e., it allows no flexibility in action.
You have also considered the other possibility here, i.e., whether it would be ok to have a universal rule that one must help their siblings, or be honest with them. Of course, since Luke’s primary role is that as an ABC employee, that role must take precedence here.
In this case, since Luke is first a professional, you may like to ask: “What would the world be like if everyone in Luke’s position shared confidential company information outside with the others?”
Would this help you make more convincing arguments here?
You could also apply the “means and ends” perspective of the theory here to further strengthen your arguments.
Finally, you need to state what this theory tells Luke to do.
Final Recommendation:
You seem to have some good arguments behind your final recommendations here; however, these need to be expressed more clearly and logically here to me.
Also, conclusion must be based on application of either one of the theories to case facts, as you find appropriate. However, application of theories to case facts isn’t very correctly and completely done, as pointed out above.
Arguments towards application to case facts must be clearly and correctly developed, as per the tenets of these theories.
Understanding the theories, the case facts and the approach to finding a solution to the given problem needs to be tackled in a systematic manner.
All relevant aspects of the theories, and the choices and their consequences must be considered in your analysis.
For example, how is the greater good served by Luke informing his brother—this is not clear to me, as majority company employees and the company’s stakeholders could suffer in this case?
How are Luke’s obligations to ABC Company any lesser than those towards a family member, especially, as this information comes to him as part of his job responsibilities.
Written Communication:
A little better organization of the application of theories to the case facts will help you improve your paper. Some key aspects of theory application have not been considered or do not come across very clearly.
Arguments to support the recommended action could be developed in some more detail to make your point convincingly, in line with the application of the theories.
Develop your arguments such that they are logical and convincing to the reader.
Do remember to proofread the paper to ensure that there are no language, spelling and punctuation errors.
